On Thu 01-11-12 17:05:39, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu,  1 Nov 2012 16:07:27 +0400
> Glauber Costa <glom...@parallels.com> wrote:
> 
> > Because the ultimate goal of the kmem tracking in memcg is to track slab
> > pages as well, we can't guarantee that we'll always be able to point a
> > page to a particular process, and migrate the charges along with it -
> > since in the common case, a page will contain data belonging to multiple
> > processes.
> > 
> > Because of that, when we destroy a memcg, we only make sure the
> > destruction will succeed by discounting the kmem charges from the user
> > charges when we try to empty the cgroup.
> 
> There was a significant conflict with the sched/numa changes in
> linux-next,

Just for record. The conflict was introduced by 2ef37d3f (memcg: Simplify
mem_cgroup_force_empty_list error handling) which came in via Tejun's
tree.
Your resolution looks good to me. Sorry about the trouble.

> which I resolved as below.  Please check it.
> 
> static int mem_cgroup_reparent_charges(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> {
>       struct cgroup *cgrp = memcg->css.cgroup;
>       int node, zid;
>       u64 usage;
> 
>       do {
>               if (cgroup_task_count(cgrp) || !list_empty(&cgrp->children))
>                       return -EBUSY;
>               /* This is for making all *used* pages to be on LRU. */
>               lru_add_drain_all();
>               drain_all_stock_sync(memcg);
>               mem_cgroup_start_move(memcg);
>               for_each_node_state(node, N_HIGH_MEMORY) {
>                       for (zid = 0; zid < MAX_NR_ZONES; zid++) {
>                               enum lru_list lru;
>                               for_each_lru(lru) {
>                                       mem_cgroup_force_empty_list(memcg,
>                                                       node, zid, lru);
>                               }
>                       }
>               }
>               mem_cgroup_end_move(memcg);
>               memcg_oom_recover(memcg);
>               cond_resched();
> 
>               /*
>                * Kernel memory may not necessarily be trackable to a specific
>                * process. So they are not migrated, and therefore we can't
>                * expect their value to drop to 0 here.
>                * Having res filled up with kmem only is enough.
>                *
>                * This is a safety check because mem_cgroup_force_empty_list
>                * could have raced with mem_cgroup_replace_page_cache callers
>                * so the lru seemed empty but the page could have been added
>                * right after the check. RES_USAGE should be safe as we always
>                * charge before adding to the LRU.
>                */
>               usage = res_counter_read_u64(&memcg->res, RES_USAGE) -
>                       res_counter_read_u64(&memcg->kmem, RES_USAGE);
>       } while (usage > 0);
> 
>       return 0;
> }
> 

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to